CATALYST WALKS
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
March 28, 2010
VANCOUVER – Catalyst representatives walked away from talks with the Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union representatives yesterday. The union had asked for 3 days of meetings with the employer due to the ever-deepening crisis in the forest industry in British Columbia.
“I am very surprised that this employer would walk away from a meeting where workers from 4 different mills had offered more than 15 ½ percent reduction in wages and continuing discussions to find further potential cost savings within the benefits structure,” stated CEP Vice President Jim Britton. “In my more than 40 years of collective bargaining, I have never witnessed a more unexpected turn of events.”
CEP had asked to meet with the senior management of Catalyst in Nanaimo in an effort to provide assistance to the company who has been very public about its financial challenges. “We know the challenges that our industry faces all across the country,” continues Britton. “This meeting was called in good faith by our union with the intention of working cooperatively to find solutions.”
“We were just trying to be proactive here.” said Britton, “We have heard very clearly the concerns that Catalyst has raised and we are prepared to have serious discussions with them even though there are more than two years left in the current collective agreement.”
“We are also extremely concerned about the communities where our members live,” concludes Britton. “These have been family-supporting and community-supporting jobs and we intend to be part of a healthy pulp and paper sector well into the future.”
CEP represents 7 local unions employed by Catalyst at four locations: Campbell River, Port Alberni, Crofton and Powell River. The Campbell River mill has been shut down for more than a year.
CEP represents 30,000 forest workers across Canada.
-30-
For more information contact:
Jim Britton, Vice President 604 992-6625
46 Comments »
Leave a comment
-
Archives
- March 2013 (1)
- December 2012 (1)
- November 2012 (2)
- October 2012 (2)
- September 2012 (1)
- August 2012 (2)
- May 2012 (2)
- March 2012 (1)
- February 2012 (1)
- January 2012 (1)
- November 2011 (2)
- October 2011 (1)
-
Categories
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS
Elk Falls Workers 
Dan have you ever printed the latest company proposal?
Comment by perry | April 7, 2010 |
I don’t think we have. It’s not very different from the first one other than one week more vacation from 5 to 6 weeks max and one percent less they want to pay toward the pension from 6% to 5%. I will look and see if we have it in electronic form.
Comment by Dan | April 8, 2010 |
…were do I start,
First off I do not appreciate retires or union brothers giving me the history of unionism or instructing us at Elk to hold firm. I’ve been a member for 28+ years and alway went with the flow, I feel I have to give my view. Having MY employment threatened has put my family in a position of doing without, and I do not like it. Adjusting to my EI income has given me the oppertunity to pay for my own benefits, this was a eye opener. With my schooling almost done and being told I could expect anywhere from $13-$18 per hour before taxes, if I find a job, is not quite the wage I had planned on. Maybe I could sell my house and move into a trailer park. Relocation up north or to Alberta is out of the question. In my opinion what the company has offered is an untimely slap in the face, and a unfortunate kick in groin, but because of the position I am in, I would be forced to accept most of it, still standing up.
Sorry if I offended anyone, but it is in my nature to do so.
rickj
Comment by rickj | April 5, 2010 |
Sorry for not getting all the posts up til tonight – The holiday weekend seemed to get in the way.
And before anyone gets excited and starts a rumour about why the ratings have disappeared. I noticed one comment that people were artificially inflating the numbers so I tried to change the settings and ended up losing them all. – Ian
Comment by Ian | April 4, 2010 |
Just like Mark S,I also check the blog from day to day to see what has been posted.
Opinions being what they are,with all due respect, are only opinions.
What I do not like about this blog are the posting that appear, with the authors hiding behind pseudonym’s.
This blog was designed to give members information and facts, “NOT” to become a ” whiner’s and crier’s ” board, carefully monitor & edited,with comments only being posted if they see fit.
What has been presented to the remaining employees at Elk Falls,is a far cry from what we use to have,
but that is a FACT,there is no use looking in the rear-view mirror when your trying to go forward
Catalyst Paper has a far better media department then the local does, that is a FACT. When newspaper articles report the number of $82,000/year per employees,apparently the company has their numbers in some kind of order and I believe that the union should too.
No more “roughly” working out the numbers,get the FACTS, present it to the members, and addressed in a timely fashion.
Dragging our feet any longer will only result in the wearing out of our shoes.
Respectfully, I have read many opinions posted on here,
and this is mine.
Kal Kowbel
Kal
Comment by Kal | April 3, 2010 |
It is a shame that the company cannot stay afloat with 15.5% from all four mills instead of 48% from one mill and 0% (for now) from the other three. Obviously Garneau et al think some form of concession will be rammed down the rest in the future. Well, if they think 48% is coming to my mill they had better be prepared to shut it down for 16+ months, lose over half of the employees, and throw a mountain of cash at it to restart as well. I wish I knew what the magic number is that would satisfy Catalyst in such a way that all four mills could be running with the same contract. At least we know where the goal posts used to be (between 48% and 15.5%). It is too easy for the company to move orders from one mill to the next when we have more papermachines than paper orders, especially when one mill is willing to work for less. This is not an attack on Elk Falls, the situation could easily be reversed. In fact, this cycle could go on forever. If we all had the same contract within Catalyst, then the boys in control would actually have to earn their paycheque by figuring out ways to be better than our competition. As a final note, I am also of the opinion that the bankruptcy of Catalyst may be a better option for the unions. Surely the contracts that we could sign after the sell-off would be better than 48% since the new owners wouldn’t be saddled with the debt of the present owners. As well, we wouldn’t need to take the huge pay cuts that the mills back east had to to protect the retirees (ie their dads, uncles, aunts etc…) Since our pension is in trust, it is not the company’s asset or liability, and the contributions have always been paid.
Comment by CEP686-slave | April 3, 2010 |
Remember Port Alberni started the concession process so don’t fault the Elk Falls members left for putting food on their families table.
Comment by In Solidarity | April 3, 2010 |
Albeit, macaroni and cheese. It probably is irrelevant anyway. Does anyone really believe Catalyst is going to restart Elk? They have a new Elk already, its called Snowflake. Good luck you guys.
Comment by Unknown Catalyst Drone | April 6, 2010
I thought I had made it clear: I was not blaming Elk Falls at all. In fact, I don’t think anybody should. Port Alberni wagged the finger of shame at Port Alice when they signed their contract to restart their mill. One and a half years later, it was our turn to have the finger of shame wagged at us to restart one of the two idled papermachines, and possbly save the entire mill… So no, I wont be wagging a finger at anyone anytime soon.
Comment by CEP686-slave | April 6, 2010
Mark
I did a rough calculation based on what I know. Hopefully next week we will be able to give you a better idea of what it all means to be at “40/hr). I based the benefit costs on what some of the members paid last year so it should be close. Of course it includes 50% cost sharing as per the company proposal.
2009 winder rate=$35.77/hr
less 20%=$28.62/hr
times 84 hrs=$2403.74 Thats the pay for 2 weeks average on shift. There isn’t any Sunday premiums,averaging etc.
Deductions
EI =$42.00
Canada Pension=$112
Our Pension=$312 Catalyst paying 5% means we would have to pay 13% (assuming we could stay in the plan)
Dental,Extended health,LTDI,AD&D,MSP and WI at 50% cost share=$145(that could be a little low)
Income tax at 18%=432.67
Total deductions=1043/2 weeks
Gross pay was 2403/2 weeks
Net Pay=$1363 every two weeks.
Thats a pretty rough estimate for an average pay check for a shift worker.
For a dayshift forklift operator in the yard that makes about $27/hour now it would be about $940 per 2 weeks.
As I said it’s a rough estimate from what I know.
Dan
Comment by Dan | April 3, 2010 |
Dan I realize that this was just a rough estimate,
By using a online tax program a member can get a much more realistic idea of there personal bottom line.
Max CPP and EI are not as high as you stated
You calculated tax against gross income not net.
Pension premiums are tax deductible
Some members are married and have children that are tax deductible
Premiums paid to extended health are deductible
Gain sharing(if profitable)was not mentioned
All of this changes a members tax rate.
My personal calculation came out different then your rough estimate.
You are probably right,I looked at the CPP and that does seem high. As I said I did a quick and dirty calculation using numbers from some old pay stubs.Your idea of using a tax program is a good one. People will have to look at their own situation.-Dan
Comment by kevin | April 3, 2010 |
And this sounds good to you?The forklift op will be working for $75 more /week than they are getting on E.I.And you’ll net a whopping $250 more /week than E.I. Guys currently on sick pay make this. Make no mistake this contract is by far the worst in B.C. Port Alberni never took any monetary concessions.
Comment by Unknown Catalyst Drone | April 3, 2010 |
Your accounting is way off,unless this blog is just for propaganda
Comment by Catalyst Worker | April 3, 2010 |
I don’t think take home pay is what we should focus on, the company’s #s just don’t add up. With 365 days in a year a shift worker will half those days on a 4 on 4 off shift yielding 182.5 days, times 12 hours per day equals 2190 hours. At $40 an hour all in that gives us a total of $87,600 for the average worker, even an “investigative reporter” from the Mirror should be able to figure that out without input from the union. That is the number which should be the basis for negotiation as some will be over that # at the higher rates and some will be under.
Benefit costs per worker would be;
Health and LTDI plus all others $200 x 22.80 equalized pay periods (365days/16)=$4,560, divided by 2190 hours = $2.08/hour.
Pension of 6% x $87,600=$5,256, divided by 2190 hours = $2.40/hour.
Holiday pay, let’s say 5 weeks average, 5 x 48 hours per week = 240 hours, so the real cost to the company is the need to cover these holidays with relief workers. 2190 hours in a year divided by 240 hours of holiday time gives 9.125 workers for each relief guy. So $87,600/9.125 = $9,600 per employee, $9,600/2190 = $4.38 per hour.
So total benefits per worker is $2.08 + $2.40 + $4.38 = $8.86 per hour.
Working backwards $40 per hour all in – $8.86 = $31.14 is the average wage for workers in the new contract.
Comment by Bob A | April 4, 2010 |
I know some will bring up the costs of EI, CPP and the retirees but these are not benefits to the workers so they should not be included in the $87,600 total as the company says this is the total benefits per worker. These other costs will need to be addressed in negotiations but don’t call them worker benefits.
Comment by Bob A | April 4, 2010 |
That statement on pensions: (assuming we could stay in the plan). Could you give me a little more insight into this. As it is one of the only reasons left to stay here for a lot people.
Just a general disclaimer as there seems to be an issue with the plan changing the percentage. I simply am not sure and like the rest of the proposal we aren’t willing to say for sure if we don’t know. Thats one more reason we need get some clarity about this proposal before we have our meeting. Most of the comments lately are like my “rough estimate” to Mark, people just guessing what it all means(I am sorry I ever tried to do that one). We need to get more information and base our decisions on what we know not what we think we know.
Comment by perry | April 4, 2010 |
The company currently pays 10% of our gross income,10% of $87,600=$8,760 into the pension plan, if they get their wish to drop it to 6%, then 6% of $87,600=$5,256 would be the average yearly contribution per worker by the company. Who knows if we could make up the difference ourselves to bring back up to the 18% maximum.
Actually they want to drop it to 5% in this proposal. The last proposal was 6%.-Dan
Comment by Bob A | April 5, 2010 |
Actually my pension numbers are wrong because contributions are made based on annual salary not total costs. So assuming $31.14/hour x 2190 hours=$68,196.60 in annual pay x 6%=$4,091.80 in employer pension contributions. $4,091.80 divided 2190 hours=$1.87 per hour, an even smaller amount towards the all in costs.
Comment by Bob A | April 5, 2010 |
Good post
There is one thing to me that does not add up. If this new proposal has the average wage at $40 all in, how can they say you will recieve $82,000 a year. Based on 1920 hrs per year that would mean your hourly wage would be roughly $43 per hour plus benifits and all the rest. I also don’t get how they are trying to offer this proposal and have no start date tied to it. Is it just supposed to be a leap of faith or what??
Best of luck.
Comment by Ned | April 2, 2010 |
The reason I hide behind a pseudonym is precisely because I still work for these carpetbaggers. I’m sure that Catalyst management believes in free speech amongst union organizers and I don’t have to fear being targeted for termination by this union friendly outfit. I removed two words from the end of this post because they were poking at another individuals comments, and added nothing of value to the comment – Ian
Comment by Unknown Catalyst Drone | April 2, 2010 |
My question is to Ian – why didn’t you delete the entire message?
I didn’t delete the entire message because the point being made was very valid – Ian
Comment by Jeff Harrison | April 2, 2010 |
Well said a much large number of current Elk employees are walking in the same shoes as you are,more than this blog would have us believe. There are multiple spin doctors playing at this event,I myself want the remaining members to have the chance at one of the chairs when the music stops.
Comment by kevin | April 2, 2010 |
I received an interesting letter today from catalyst Paper. Thought it was a April Fools Joke, but then it could well be. It appears to be an open letter to all Elk Falls Employees titled ” Looking forward; a proposal for a restarted Elk Falls mill.” By the looks of it, looks like a letter to bash the union leadership, how they were disappointed with the last meeting they had. Surprising how they never mentioned they walked out. AAAA the games continue. They really do need to look in a mirror and take a good look at themselves and realize the mismanagement team they have. OOO in the letter too, King Dick says he will be speaking to the remaining employees,just a heads up, LOL.
Comment by Dennis | April 1, 2010 |
Myself and Dave both received the same letter in the mail today…really looks like a union bash…guess King Dick wants one last kick at the can before he goes April 28…
Comment by Erika W | April 1, 2010 |
The letter is in the Campbell River Mirror tonigt printed by their editor.
Here is the link. Mr. Garneau is coming to speak to the 100 employees left.
http://www.bclocalnews.com/vancouver_island_north/campbellrivermirror/news/89712647.html
Comment by In Solidarity | April 1, 2010 |
Let me get this right Catalyst creates this mess and then turns around and tries to pin it on the executive? I thought magic mushroom season was in October not March? Man up Garneau and admit you and them other bozos you call a management team screwed up. April 28th cant come soon enough, can’t say your going to missed, good riddance.
Comment by larry the letch | April 1, 2010 |
It seems like Dick has got it all figured out if workers in the entire forest industry accept much lower living standards and if governments of all levels subsidize the forest industry; then he and his cronies can make out really well in his New World Order, Post recession apocalypse.
Comment by Unknown Catalyst Drone | April 2, 2010 |
Elk Falls Workers Blog
It seems that this blog has been infected with by parties unknown, who most likely do not work at Elk and continue to post using a pseudonym.
Posting under an alias won’t add validity to an opinion and logging in repeatedly to change the rate up or down is childish.
What was intended to be a way to deliver information to Elk Falls employees has changed to something different than originally intended.So I for one one request that the blog administrator return this blog to its origins.
This blog is about getting information to our members, but it is public. I have no way to go through and find out who is our member and who isn’t as some of “our” members are posting under multiple aliases and also refuse to identify themselves (you know who you are). We could refuse to post anything that doesn’t have an identifiable author but I got flamed the last time I did that.
I do agree people have to make up their own mind, we are trying to get information to people so they can make an informed decision.-Dan
To the remaining members we are all educated, you guys are capable of sound decision making, based on your immediate and future needs and your decisions should not be based on some unknown poster comments.
Comment by kevin | April 2, 2010
Why do you guys continue to talk to these lying pr**ks. The mill WILL NOT OPEN until the market dictates it. PERIOD. And that could be an extremely long time .
My advice – take your severance and find some other job…Catalyst is just interested in screwing you as hard as possible so they can squeeze concessions out of the other locals. To hell with them. The only real chance this mill has of opening is under a new company after bankruptcy proceedings reduce their debt and gut the collective agreement.
Comment by bob | March 31, 2010 |
Please, in solidarity remember that the solvency of that company provides my brothers with bridging, or is this covered by some other donor?
Comment by Brian Gordon | April 1, 2010 |
Recently Catalyst Paper has said that they could possibly re-open the Elk Falls Mill here in Campbell River at some point in the future under certain conditions. Those conditions would be….
1. improvement in markets
2. fibre becoming available
3. huge reductions in property taxes
4. a deeply gutted collective agreement by the mill workers that would include a wage freeze after a 20% reduction in hourly wages from the existing collective agreement, plus cuts to benefits, holidays etc.
The reality here in my opinion is that Catalyst has four mills in B.C., but in order to meet or supply their market demands they need to run only 2.5 or 3 of those mills. That means that one mill or maybe in the near future two mills will ALWAYS be shut down at least until markets become better. This being said I don’t believe for a minute that concessions from workers would restart the mill here in Campbell River.
In my opinion agreeing to the concessions that Catalyst wants would not start the mill here but be used to bring down wages in their other mills by threatening to shut them down if the workers there don’t agree to the same. Even if all the C.E.P. locals from all the Catalyst mills sit down with the company to bargain concessions together it won’t reopen the Elk Falls mill. The only thing that will start the mill again is market conditions.
In today’s local newspapers it was reported that the Catalyst mill in Crofton will restart the mills second line in May. They said that all Crofton pulp mill workers would be recalled to work. So did the union membership in Crofton agree to massive concessions? No, the workers will work under the existing collective agreement. The market for their product improved.
Remember one thing for sure…ACCEPTING CONCESSIONS IS LIKE JUMPING ON A GREASY SLOPE. YOU DON’T STOP UNTIL YOU HIT BOTTOM!
Comment by Graham Auger | March 31, 2010 |
when i started at the mill in 1977 there were trees and fish everywhere. in fact most of us couldn’t see the trees for the forest. Crown Zellerbach was an American owned family run business fully integrated with a sawmill, kraftmill and converting plants as well a shipping company. They were by far a better employer to work for even though we still had our differences (union/management) when the high interest rates of the 1980’s our Elk Falls still ran where other mills took curtailments but because of the sawmill and kraft mill when one side of the business was in decline one of the others was safer. As well the Canadian $ was hovering around .70 cents.. The fact is our mill still ran. The problems that we face today stem from our collective inability to fight the changes that our governments have brought forward in the past thirty years. we reap what we sow or as I have called it before “full belly empty head” and since catalyst has control of the company they have brought their agenda of “market driven anti-unionism” in fact this has been going on around us for some time the fact that “yacko poury” consulting report came out only gave the company the added ammo to fight us.
They picked the locals that would give in to their agenda Port Alberni comes to mind. It is no surprise that they choose the elk falls site to wage war on us. over the past thirty years the two locals have taken on every fight to gain a fair collective agreement. How many strikes did we all sit on the “line”.
Whats happening here is the spin off of what is going on in the USofA. (Bow Water mills) only we are about ten years behind. If you look at some of the collective agreements in the US you will see what I mean. Our HR VP came from the US (Algoma Steel) and is driving this agenda as I said to him we are in Canada lets keep it Canadian. so it was no surprise to me when they left the meetings in Naniamo.
As for me I didn’t like taking severance I would have liked to been signing retirement papers instead. the mill has provided a good and steady income and life style that alot of Canadians would envy, but after what has been going on and the fact that catalyst is a difficult employer to work for based on the “yako poury” report the best years are behind us and it is time to move on. As for whats in store for the rest is pretty obvious this current board wants it all.the driver for them is make sure my investment pays off and who cares who it hurts… too bad catalsyt isn’t Canadian anymore….cerndog
Comment by cerndog | March 31, 2010 |
I really don’t see why we even bother talking to Catalyst, it really a waste of time and breath. Give us a startup date, then we will talk. Too many MAYBES, IFS, COULDS and WHENS. So WHEN, they COULD MAYBE give us a date and IF we have anyone left, MAYBE we COULD negotiate something. I for one, believe you can take a step back and improve on something. BUT, I’m NOT ready to step a mile back and work like the pre-union days. Our fore fathers would of died for nothing and would be rolling in their coffins, with what’s going on now. I think it’s time to slam the door in their face and move on in the next chapter of life. Thank you. I can only imagine what our union leaders have to put up with and what they have to go thru. KUDOS to you guys.
Comment by Dennis | March 29, 2010 |
15.5% give back and this so called desperate company walks away, disgusting. I hope the municipalities are paying attention.
Comment by Ron Foort | March 31, 2010 |
Instead of having a question and answer period, why don’t we have a special meeting with all the members who did not take the severance? This would prevent a repeat of the last general meeting where the people who want to work at Elk Falls were outnumbered by those that had elected to leave.
Comment by Jeff Harrison | March 29, 2010 |
On a issue as important as the future of Elk Falls,why is there not going to be a formal meeting,just a off the record meet and great.Let the membership have their say in a proper forum.
I’m not convinced we need a formal meeting yet. At the last general meeting we got direction to be part of the meetings with Catalyst and the other locals first and then talk about the proposal at Elk. We just completed the first part and they walked away from the meetings without negotiating with us. We will now need to meet them about the Elk proposal as we said we would.
We would have had a special meeting to tell people about what we know so far, but as it’s spring break we thought a lot of members will be busy with family. We thought it would be better for us to be at the union hall this Tuesday and Wednesday so people can just drop in when it’s convenient and talk to us. – Dan
Comment by kevin | March 29, 2010 |
Dan / Ian Any idea when these meetings will happen? Since they like to repeat past offers, I hope all we will offer them is the same as what they were offered at the combined table, and/or our original $80.00 a ton proposal.
Nothing scheduled yet.
Comment by Dave A | April 5, 2010 |
The problems with Catlyst are not the workers, locations, or quality. Catalysts biggest problems are sales; extreme decline in export markets (I do not count U.S. as export), and an over reliance on brokers are merchents selling as high as 70 % of the mills’ output. One salesman, James Wright routinely dumps paper to an east coast broker. Mcgrann Paper, with shipping destinations to Albany, Ny, Charlotte, N.C., Los Angeles, and Chicago,Il at below market prices. Until their sales office out of Seattle wakes up, and secures direct orders, closer to home, this mill will always be in deep finacial trouble.
Comment by B.C. Bill | March 29, 2010 |
So doing some simple math here, for every million dollars in employee costs the company could have saved $155,000 per site for a total cost saving of $620,000. Or kick the crap out of just Elk Falls and using an overall number of say 35% cuts to wages and benefits save $350,000 at the one site and nothing at the other three.
I would suspect that such an offer from the union would have contained a clause assuring that all four sites ran.
The only conclusion I can come to is that Catalyst can not sustain all four mills and one will be down for good.
So the question is, now what ?
Comment by Gerard | March 29, 2010 |
Comments removed as they were more intent on taking cheap shots anonymously at the executive than giving a position.
Comment by rob | March 29, 2010 |
You hit the nail on the head here Gerard. Its what Ive been saying all along, that the bottom line is One Catalyst mill is GOING DOWN no matter what we do! SO why give them anything???????
Comment by Unknown Catalyst Drone | March 29, 2010 |
Crofton announced today that the 2nd kraft line will start up in May. Interesting timing on this since the weekend discussions……………….
News Release on restart of 2nd line
Comment by In Solidarity | March 29, 2010 |
To the senior management team of catalyst paper
My name is Gordon Hartley. I have worked in your Elk Falls plant since 1987 and I have always considered myself a loyal employee. I have just read the news release from Jim Britton and am now really confused. Please answer me this, are the recent negotiations with the locals about keeping our operations running or are they about something else. Financial papers are already saying that we as a company are in a lot better shape than most of the industry yet you seem to think it appropriate to walk out of these negotiations when being offered a 15.5% wage rollback. has your contempt for your own workforce come to this. I find this insulting that you wouldn’t stay and discuss anything else. I know I was not at the meeting and I have no first hand knowledge of what was said. I have not signed up for my severance package yet, but your actions are making it seem like that may become inevitable. A company is about more than just the bottom line . There are people that truly wish to see your company do well. ( I would love to say OUR company but your actions really do show that you consider your employees as a liability not an asset). It`s just so sad that you can`t seem to see that you have a workforce that does want to work through this critical time but you seem bent on making this a game about winning and losing. I believe in this game there is going to be no winner. If you feel like addressing any of my concerns you can get my Email address from Carla. I`ll thank you in advance for taking the time to read this
Comment by Gord Hartley | March 28, 2010 |
I think its safe to say that Catalyst does not consider itself to be a loyal employer ,Gord. They are not negotiators ,they are proclaimers ,ultimators and tax evaders!
Comment by Unknown Catalyst Drone | March 31, 2010 |
These guys ran a story about how loyal they are.
Catalyst is listed on the Jantzi Social Index® and is also ranked by Corporate Knights as one of the 50 Best Corporate Citizens in Canada
Comment by In Solidarity | April 1, 2010
So are the active members of local 1123 suppose to call Jim Britton or will the 1123 executive give us a report in a timely manner. This is a copy of the news release that went out from the CEP Western Region office this evening. We will go over finer details at our next GM, but the majority of the information is contained in the release. There was a proposal made to Catalyst, they looked at it, said they weren’t interested and went home??? – Ian
Comment by Catalyst Worker | March 28, 2010 |